ML20214D667
| ML20214D667 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 11/10/1986 |
| From: | Grimsley D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Twana Ellis HUNTON & WILLIAMS |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214D670 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-656 NUDOCS 8611240193 | |
| Download: ML20214D667 (3) | |
Text
U.S. NUCLEAR RE!ULATORY CCMMISSION haC Foin.Eoutsi huvetRisi
...86-656
[T E
S s.
I RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF p -Ol
^"
l ""
..o~s.1w .
K l ""'"
N eeeee / INFORMATION ACT (FOlA) REQUEST NOV 10 W DOCKET NUMBER.St t# euwceaes REOutsiER T. S. Ellis, III PART l.-RECORDS RELEASED OR NOT LOCATED ISee checked baiesi No agency records subject to the request have been located.
No additonal agency records subject to the request have been located.
Agency records subject to the request that are identsfed in Appendix A a,e ai,eady avaiiawe fo, puuic insmten and copwng in ih. NRC Public Document Roorn, y 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC.
Agency records subrect to the request that are identifed in Appendix R are being made avaiiabie fo, pubiic inspection and copying in the NRC Public Document y Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC, in a folder under the FOIA number and requester name.
The nonproprietary verson of the proposal (s) that you agreed to accept in a telephone conversation with a enember of my staff is now being made avalable for public inspection and coying at the NRC Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N W , Washington, DC, in a folder under this FOIA number and requester name.
Enclosed is informaten on how you may obtain access to and the charges for copying records placed in the NRC Public Document Room,1717 H Street. N.W., Washington, DC.
Agency recceds subsect to the request are enclosed. Any applicable charge for copies of the records provided and payment procedures are noted in the comments secton.
Records subt ect to the request have been referred to another Federal agencyties) for review and direct response to you.
In www of NRC's response to the request, no further action a being taken on appeal etter dated PART ll.A-INFORMATION WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Certain informaton in the requested records is beeng withheld from puuic disclosure pursuant to the FOIA exemptions described in and for the reasons stated in Part 11, sec-tions 8. C, and D. Any released portens of the documents for which only part of the record is being withheld are being made available for public inspection and copying in the NRC Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC, in a folder under the FOIA number and requester name.
Comments The computer printout provided previously to you does not include all NRR documents regarding TDI. The printout is approximately one year old and several NRR documents have been published since last fall. The documents are listed on the enclosed appendicies.
$12g3861110 ELLIS96-656 PDR S GN . DIRECTOR. i SiON LES AND RECORDS
/ v $
NRC FORM 484 Wen it Gasi
APPENDIX A FOIA-86-656
- 1. 05/27/86 - Letter to Ker.neth P. Baskin from Richard F. Dudley re:
Transamerica-Delaval (TDI) Diesel Engine Reliability and .
Operability, Acc. No. 8605300296
- 2. 06/30/86 - NUREG-1216 - Final Staff SER, Acc. No. 8609100233
- 3. 10/24/86 - NUREG-1038 - Shearon Harris SSER No. 4, Acc. No. 8312230068 a
1 i
l '
l .
de
a ,
k 4 ii ,
APPENDIX 3 f01A-86-656' 1
- 1. 11/19/84 -
Letter to Kenneth P. Baskin from D. M. Crutchfield're:
Transamerica Delaval, Inc. (TDI) Diesel Engine Reliability and Operability - San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 ~
- 2. 10/21/86 -
Catawba-Unit 1 License Amentdment 15'
- 3. 05/12- -
Paper entitled, " Reliability Improvement of Medium Speed 14/86 Diesels in Nuclear Standby Applications," by Carl H. Berlinger and Emmett L. Murphy s
- 4. 09/86 -
Paper entitled, " Resolving the Transamerica Delaval Diesel Generator Issue," by Carl Berljnger and Emmett L. Murphy
- 5. Undated -
Paper entitled, " Emergency Diesel Generators Manufactured by Transamerica Delaval, Inc., Problems, Their Resolution and Lesscns Learned," by -Carl Berlinger and Emmett L. Murphy E
s k
9 v
I H UNTON & WII.I.I AM s !
707 EAST MAIN STREET P.O. Box 1535 aooo pt==sTLvakia avtNUE. N w R1enxown. V1noxw A 20212 .co p == avtwut p o aox seaso =tw vona, htw comm sooi?
waswimoTom. o c roo3e TELtewont asa soo4ooo vatspwomc aoa ess esoo TE LE PHON E 804-788 8200 TELt m da4see av=T u.
FIRST yenGaNia sawn Towan TELEX 6844251 ont aaN=ovta sovant p o som sees e o.somsee wonroun. vinoewim assie mattson, wonrw camouma 27eca Trote ows so4-eas snot TELapwo=tsie-eessooo m an7ssoas August 28, 1986 , , , , , , _ , , , , , , , _ , , ,
sono cumig enioot moao p o som ose e o somsee7 ***ouwsLLE. Tchht sset 37eo' FAINFan, vsAGINsA aro3o TELapnogt StS-e37 4388 TELtenomt yo3-3sa atoo ointcT oeat No som 7ee-CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED StEEDOM OF INFORMATION ACI REQUEST Director, Office of Administration [d[/ -gf-h U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 hg/g gg
Dear Sir:
This is a request for documents and records pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. SS 552, et seq.,
and 10 CFR SS 9.1, g seq.
s This request is made on behalf of the Long Island Lighting Company whose principal place of business is located in Suffolk County, New York.
In this request, the term " documents and records" is defined to include the following:
All reports, records, lists, inter-office memoranda, intra-office memoranda, data, telegrams; correspon-dence, schedules, photographs, sound reproductions, ledger books, log books, data sheets, graphs, catalogues, com-puter tapes, records or printouts, notes, records of telephone conversa-tions, meeting agendas, attendance lists, minutes or notes of meetings, statements or any other handwritten, typewritten, printed, recorded or graphic material of any kind or de-scription whatsoever.
The documents and records sought in this request are as follows:
(
4tG, w -,
vuy4 y, I
F5 , ,.,
+
7 H UNTON Oc WI LLI AM S i ,6 6
3 August 28, 1986 Page 2 All documents and records of any kind i pertaining in any way to Nuclear Regu-latory Commission audits, inspections or investigations of Transamerica Delaval, Inc. from 1974 to the present.
, , If the Nuclear Regulatory Commission decides to with-s hold from our client and the public or to refrain from disclosing to our client and the public any documents or records responsive to this request, then we request that you furnish us with a detailed statement of the reasons for denying access to each document withheld and the following information regarding each such document or record in order to enable our client to consider whether t'o seek a judicial remedy under the Act:
(a) the date of each such docu-ment or record; (b) the identity of the author or authors and addressee or addressees of each such document or record; (c) the identity of all persons in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission or elsewhere who received copies of each such document or record; (d) the title of each such docu-ment or record; (e) the general nature and sub-ject matter of each such document or record; and (f) whether each such document or record contains any factual informa-tion, including, but not limited to, data, descriptions, and critiques of methodologies or statements of policy.
b W
H UNTON & WILLI AM S August 28, 1986 Page 3 If portions of any responsive documents are deleted before disclosure, we request, pursuant to 10 CFR S 9.6, a statement in writing describing the scope and reasons for any deletion.
It is not necessary that the documents be copied and delivered to us. We will be happy to review the documents at the production location. Note that LILCO is willing to pay any appropriate copying costs or fees attributable to this request and needs no prior notice of the amount of such fees.
We respectfully request a response within ten working days of receipt of this request pursuant to 5 U.S.C. S 552(a)(6)(A) and 10 CPR S 9.9.
Finally, I ask that you call me if you have any ques-tions regarding this request.
Si ly,
. El r_ILF
/
75/4794
,,[ 'o, UNITED STATES
, y 7, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.t 5 WASH WGTON, D. C. 20555
- 9. ,
- o , , #, October 21, 1986 i
Docket No.: 50-413 Mr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President Nuclear Production Department Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242
Dear Mr. Tucker:
Subject:
Issuance of Amendment No.16 to facility Operating License NPF-35 Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 16 to Facility Operating License NPF-35 for the Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1.
This amendirent is in response to your letter dated August 6,1986. The other change requested in that letter for Catawba Unit 2 is still under staff re-view and will be addressed in future correspondence.
The amendment changes a license condition and Attachment I to NPF-35 to in-corporate the recomendations and conclusions contained in the NRC staff's Safety Evaluation Report on Operability / Reliability of Emergency Diesel
.. Generators Manufactured by Transamerica Delaval, Inc. published as NUREG-1216.
The amendment is effective as of its date of issuance.
A copy of the related safety evaluation supporting Amendment No. 16 to facility Operating License NPF-35 is enclosed.
Notice of issuance will be included in the Comission's next bi-weekly Federal Register notice.
Sincerely, (kY ~
Kahtan Jabbour, Project Manager PWR Project Directorate #4 Division of PWR Licensing-A
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No.16 to NPF-35
- 2. Safety Evaluation cc w/ enc 1:
See next page r_ ! nn .c - /
A O b.
- (k [h Y
's Mr. H. B. Tucker Duke Power Company Catawba Nuclear Station cc:
William L. Porter, Esq. North Carolina Electric Membership Duke Power Company Corp.
4 P.O. Box 33189 3333 North Boulevard Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 P.O. Box 27306 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
Bishop, Libennan, Cook, Purcell Saluda River Electric Cooperative, and Reynolds Inc.
1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W. P.O. Box 929 Washington, D. C. 20036 Laurens, South Carolina 29360 North Carolina MPA-1 Senior Resident Inspector Suite 600 Route 2, Box 179N
- 3100 Smoketree Ct. York, South Carolina 29745 P.O. Box 29513 Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0513 Regional Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, L.L. Williams 101 Marietta Street, NW, Suite 2900 Area Manager, Mid-South Area Atlanta, Georgia 30323 ESSD Projects Westinghouse Electric Corp.
MNC West Tower - Bay 239 P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Mr. Heyward G. Shealy, Chief Bureau of Radiological Health NUS Corporation South Carolina Department of Health 2536 Countryside Boulevard and Environmental Control Clearwater, Florida 33515 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201 County Manager of York County York County Courthouse Karen E. Long York South Carolina 29745 Assistant Attorney General N.C. Department of Justice Richard P. Wilson, Esq. P.O. Box 629 Assistant Attorney General Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 S.C. Attorney General's Office P.O. Box 11549 ,
Spence Perry, Esquire Columbia, South Carolina 29211 General Counsel Federal Emergency Management Agency Piedmont Municipa) Power Agency Room 840 100 Memorial Drive 500 C Street Greer, South Carolina 29651 Washington, D. C. 20472 Mark S. Calvert, Esq. Mr. Michael Hirsch Bishop, Liberman, Cook, Federal Emergency Management Agency Purcell & Reynolds Office of the General Counsel 1200 17th Street, N.W. Room 840 Washington, D. C. 20036 500 C Street, S.W.
Washington, D. C. 20472 Brian P. Cassidy, Regional Counsel Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region I J. W. McConnach P0CH Boston, Massachusetts 02109
ff >Wi ?,
$ UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y \ . j 3, WASHINGT ON, D. C. 20555
- 9 DUKE POWER COMPANY NORTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC NEMBERSHIo CORPORATION SALUDA RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-413 CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 AMENDFNT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 16 License No. NPF-35
- 1. The Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) has found that:
A. The application for amendment to the Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (the facility) Facility Operating License No. NPF-35 filed by the Duke Power Company acting for itself, North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation and Saluda River Electric Cooperative, Inc., (licensees) dated August 6, 1986. complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Comission's regulations as set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B. The facility will operate in confomity with the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the regulations of the Comission; C. There is reasonable assurance: (1) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Connission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; D. The issuance of this license amendment will not be inimical to the l com on defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; E. The issuance of this amendirent is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Comission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.
,.A-W p n s l
a
- 2. Accordingly, facility Operating License No. NPF-35 is hereby changed as follows:
A. Change paragraph 2.C.(20) to read as follows:
Transamerica Delaval, Inc. (TDI) Diesel Generators (Section 8.3.1 55ER 74',3 UREG-1216)
Duke Power Company shall implement the TDI oiesel requirements as specified in Attachnent 1 into its maintenance and surveillance program. Attachnent 1 is hereby incorporated into this license.
B. Change Attachment I to NPF-35 to read as follows:
Duke Power Company shall comply with the following requirements re-lated to the TDI diesel engines for Catawba Unit 1.
- 1. Changes to the maintenance / surveillance program for the TDI diesel engines, as identified in the licensee's submittals of August I and September 11, 1986, shall be subject to the pro-visions of 10 CFR 50.59. The frequency of the major engine overhauls referred to in the license conditions below shall be consistent with Section IV.I. " Overhaul Frequency," in Revision 2 of Appendix II of the Design Review / Quality Revalidation Report which was transmitted by letter dated May 1, 1986, from J. B. George, Owners Group, to H. R. Denton, NRC.
- 2. Connecting rod assemblies shall be subjected to the following in-spections at each major engine overhaul:
(a) The surfaces of the rack teeth should be inspected for signs of fretting. If fretting has occurred, it should be subject to an engineering evaluation for appropriate corrective action.
(b) All connecting rod bolts should be lubricated in accordance with the engine manufacturer's instructions and torqued to the specifications of the manufacturer. The lengths of the two pairs of bolts above the crankpin should be measured ultrasonically before and after tensioning.
(c) The lengths of the two pairs'of bolts above the crankpin shculd be remeasured ultrasonically before detensioning and disassembly of the bolts. If bolt tension is less than 93% of the value at in-stallation, the cause should be determined, appropriate corrective action should be taken, and the interval between checks of bolt tension should be reevaluated. '
... (d) All connecting rod bolts should be visually inspected for thread damage (e.g., galling), and the two pairs of connecting rod bolts above the crankpin should be inspected by magnetic particle testing to verify the continued absence of cracking. All l washers used with the bolts should be examined visually for signs '
of galling or cracking, and replaced if damaged.
(e) A visual inspection should be perfomed of all external surfaces of the link rod box to verify the absence of any signs of service-induced stress.
(f) All of the bolt holes in the link rod box should be inspected for thread damage (e.g., galling) or other signs of abnormalities.
In adcition, the bolt holes subject to the highest stresses
'e(e.g., xamined thewith pair an imediately appropriate above the crankpin) nondestructive should method to be verify the continued absence of cracking. Any indications shoulo be recorded for engineering evaluation and appropriate corrective action.
- 3. (a ) Cylinder blocks shall be inspected for " ligament" cracks,
" stud-to-stud" cracks and " stud-to-end" cracks as defined in a report by Failure Analysis Associates, Inc. (FaAA) entitled
" Design Review of TDI R-4 and RV-4 Series Emergency Diesel Generator Cylinder Blocks" (FaAA report no. FaAA-84-9-11.1) and dated December 1984. (Note that the FaAA report specifies additional inspections to be performed for blocks with "known"
. or assumed" ligament cracks.) The inspection intervals (i.e.,
frequency) shall not exceed the intervals calculated using the cumulative damage index model in the subject FaAA report. In addition, inspection methods shall be consistent with or equivalent to those identified in the subject FaAA report.
(b) In addition to inspections specified in the aforementioned FaAA report, blocks with "known" or " assumed" ligament cracks (as defined in the FaAA report) should be inspected at each refueling outage to detemine whether or not cracks have initiated on the top surface, which was exposed because of the removal of two or niore cylinder heads. This process should be repeated over several refueling outages until the entire block has been inspected.
Liquid penetrant testing or a similarly sensitive nondestructive testing technique should be used to detect cracking, and eddy current testing should be used as appropriate to detemine the depth of any cracks discovered.
(c) If inspection reveals cracks in the cylinder blocks between stud holes of adjacent cylinders (" stud-to-stud" cracks) or " stud-to-end cracks, this cor.dition shall be reported promptly to the NRC staff and the affected engine shall be considered inoperable.
The engine shall not be restored to " operable status" until the proposed disposition and/or corrective actions have been approved by the NRC staff.
,. 4-4 The following air-roll test shall be perforned as specified below, except when the Sant is already in an Action 5_tatement of Technical -
50ecificaticn 3/4.8.1, " Electric Power Systems, A.C. Sources":
The engines shall be rolled over with the airstart system and with the cylinder stopcocks open before each planned start, unless that start occurs within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> of a shutdown. The engines shall also be rolled over with the airstart system and with the cylinder stopcocks open af ter 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />, but no more than 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />, after engine shutdown and then rolled over once again approximately 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after each shutdown. (If an engine is removed from service for any reason other than the rolling-over procedure before expiration of the 8-hour or 24-hour periods noted above, that engine need not be rolled over while it is out of service. The licensee shall air-roll the engine over with the stopcocks open at the time it is returned to service.) The
, origin of any water detected in the cylinder must be detennined, and any cylinder head that leaks because of a crack shall be replaced.
The above-air roll test may be discontinued following the first re-fueling outage subject to the following conditions:
(a) All cylinder heads are Group III heads (f.e., cast af ter September 1980).
(b) Quality revalidation inspections, as identified in the Design Review / Quality Revalidation report, have been completed for all cylinder heads.
(c) Group III heads continue to demonstrate leak-free performance.
This should be confirmed with TDI before air-roll tests are discontinued.
- 5. Periodic inspections of the turbochargers shall include the following:
(a) The turbocharger thrust bearings should be visually inspected for excessive wear after 40 nonprelubed starts since the previous visual inspection.
(b) Turbocharger rotor axial clearance should be measured at each refueling outage to verify compliance with TDI/Elliott specifications.
In addition, thrust bearing measurements should be compared with l measurements taken previously to determine a need for further inspection or corrective action. '
(c) Spectrographic and ferrographic engine oil analysis shall be performed quarterly to provide early evidence of bearing degradation.
Particular attention should be paid to copper level and particulate size, which could signify thrust bearing degradation.
5-(d) The nozzle ring components and inlet guide vanes should be visually inspected at each refueling outage for missing parts or parts show-ing distress on a one-turbocharger-per-refueling-outage basis. In addition, these inspections should be perforned for all turboch'argers at each turbocharger overhaul (i.e., at approximately 5-year intervals).
If any missir.g parts or distress is noted, the entire ring assembly should be replaced and the subject turbocharger should be reinspected at the next refueling outage.
- 3. This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSI0f;
[h h ""
Kahtan Jabbour, Project Manager PWR Project Directorate No. 4 Division of PWR Licensing-A Date of Issuance: October 21, 1986 O
- ~ ,
[#"%Ig UNITED STATES y , 'g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.j W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N0.16 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-35 CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 DUKE POWER COMPANY, ET AL.
I. INTRODUCTION By letter dated August 6,1986, Duke Power Company, et al. , (the licensee) proposed that License Condition 2.C.(20) of Catawba Unit 1 Facility Operating License NPF-35, Attachment 1 to NPF-35, and Attachment I to Catawba Unit 2 Facility Operating License NPF-52 be amended to incorporate the recommendations and conclusions contained in the NRC Staff's Safety Evaluation Report (SER) on Operability / Reliability of Emergency Diesel Generators Manufactured by Trans-america Delaval, Inc.," transmitted to the licensee by letter dated July 2, 1986.
In August 1986, the essential portions of that SER were published as NUREG-1216.
Thus, NUREG-1216 documents the staff's evaluation of the TDI Diesel Generator Owners Group Program.
NUREG-1216 states that:
- "The staff concludes that implementation of the Owners Group reconcendations plus additional actions as identified herein will establish the adequacy of the TDI diesel generators for nuclear standby service as required by General Design Criterion 17 of Appendix A to 10 CFR 50. The staff further concludes that these actions will ensure that the design and manufacturing quality of thc TDI engines is within the range nonnally assumed for diesel engines designed and manufactured in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B. Con-tinued reliability and operability of the TDI engines for the life of the facilities will be ensured by implementation of the maintenance / surveillance program described herein."
This amendment to NPF-35 approves for Catawba Unit I the main changes requested by the licensee in its letter of August 6,1986. The amendment to NPF-52 re-quested for Catawba Unit 2 is still under staff review and is outside the scope of this amendment.
II. EVALUATION
- 1. License Condition for Catawba Unit 1 In NPF-35 as issued on January 17, 1985, License Condition 2.C.(20) regarding the TDI Diesel Generators stated that:
! " Prior to startup following the first refueling outage, Duke Power Company shall implement the TDI Owners' Group reconnendations."
Furthermore, Attachment I to NPF-35 as issued on January 17, 1985, stated that:
Y $f '
" Prior to February 5,1985, Duke Power Company (DPC) shall have implemented, to the satisfaction of the staff, the TDI diesel generator maintenance and surveillance program consnitted to in DPC letters dated July 16, October 9, and December 5, 1984, which is in accordance with the staff's SER transmitted to DPC by letter dated August 14, 1984."
The amencnent to the above License Condition in NPF-35 would be accomplished by making it similar to License Condition 2.C.(11) of Catawba Unit 2 Facility Operating License NPF-52 issued on P4y 15,1985, because the same issue is applicable to both Units. Thus, the proposed License Condition 2.C.(20) to be incorporated in NPF-35 would then read:
"Ouke Power Company shcIl implement the TDI diesel requirements as specified in Attachment 1 into its maintenance and surveillance program. Attachment 1 is hereby incorporated into this license."
The amendment to NPF-35 Attachment I would be accomplished by using the applicable sample license conditions as stated in Appendix B of NUREG-1216. Attachment I would then read:
" Duke Power Company shall comply with the following requirements related to the TDI diesel engines for Catawba Unit 1.
- 1. Changes to the maintenance and surveillance program for the TDI diesel l engines, as identified in the licensee's submittals of August 1 and September 11, 1986, shall be subject to the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59.
The frequency of the major engine overhauls referred to in the license ccnditions below shall be consistent with Section IV.1, " Overhaul Frequency," in Revision 2 of Appendix II of the Design Review /Ouality Revalidation Report which was transmitted by letter dated May 1, 1986, from J. B. George, Owners Group, to H. R. Denton, NRC.
- 2. Connecting rod assemblies shall be subjected to the following in-spections at each major engine overhaul:
(a) The surfaces of the rack teeth should be inspected for signs of fretting. If fretting has occurred, it should be subject to an engineering evaluation for appropriate corrective action.
(b) All connecting red bolts should be lubricated in accordance with the engine manufacturer's instructions and torqued to the specifications of the manufacturer. The lengths of the two pairs of bolts above the crankpin should be measured ultrasonically before and after tensioning.
(c) The lengths of the two pairs of bolts above the crankpin should be remeasured ultrasonically before detensioning and disassenbly of the bolts. If bolt tension is less than 937 of the value at in-stallation, the cause shuuld be determined, appropriate corrective action should be taken, and the interval between checks of bolt tension should be reevaluated.
,q (d) All connecting rod bolts should be visudlly inspected for thread damage (e.g., galling), and the two pairs of connecting rod bolts above the crankpin shculd be inspected by magnetic particle testing to verify the continued absence of cracking. All washers used with the bolts should be examined visually for signs of galling or cracking, and replaced if damaged.
(e) A visual inspection should be performed of all external surfaces of the link rod box to verify the absence of any signs of service-induced stress.
(f) All of the bolt holes in the link rod box should be inspected for thread damage (e.g., galling) or other signs of abnormalities.
In addition, the bolt holes subject to the highest stresses (e.g., the pair innediately above the crankpin) should be
, examined with an appropriate nondestructive method to verify the continued absence of cracking. Any indications should be recorded for engineering evaluation and appropriate corrective action.
- 3. (a) Cylinder blocks shall be inspected for " ligament" cracks,
" stud-to-stud" cracks and " stud-to-end" cracks as defined in a report by Failure Analysis Associates, Inc. (FaAA) entitled
" Design Review of TDI R-4 and RV-4 Series Emergency Diesel Generator Cylinder Blocks" (FaAA report no. FaAA-84-9-11.1) and ,
dated December 1984. (Note that the FaAA report specifies '
additional inspections to be performed for blocks with "known" or " assumed" ligament cracks.) The inspection intervals (i.e.,
frequency) shall not exceed the intervals calculated using the cumulative damage index model in the subject FaAA report. In
} addition, inspection methods shall be consistent with or equivalent to those identified in the subject FaAA report.
(b) In addition to inspections specified in the aforementioned FaAA report, blocks with "known" or " assumed" ligament cracks (as defined in the FaAA report) should be inspected at each refueling outage to determine whether or not cracks have initiated on the top surface, which was exposed because of the removal of two or more cylinder heads. This process should be repeated over several refueling outages until the entire block has been inspected.
Liquid penetrant testing or a similarly sensitive nondestructive testing technique should be used to detect cracking, and edoy current testing should be used as appropriate to determine the depth of any cracks discovered.
(c) If inspection reveals cracks in the cylinder blocks between stud holes of adjacent cylinders (" stud-to-stud" cracks) or " stud-to-end cracks, this condition shall be reported promptly to the NRC staff and the affected engine shall be considered inoperable.
The engine shall not be restored to " operable status" until the proposed disposition and/or corrective actions have been approved by the NRC staff.
.. 4. The following air-roll test shall be performed as specified below, except when the plant is already in an Action Statement of Technical Specification 3/4.8.1, " Electric Power Systems, A.C. Sources":
The engines shall be rolled over with the airstart system and with the cylinder stopcocks open before each planned start, unless that start occurs within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> of a shutdown. The engines shall also be rolled over with the airstart system and with the cylinder stopcocks open after 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />, but no more than 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />, after engine shutdown and then rolled over once again approximately 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after each shutdown. (If an engine is removed from service for any reason other than the rolling-over procedure before expiration of the 8-hour or 24-hour periods noted above, that engine need not be rolled over while it is out of service. The licensee shall air-roll the engine
,over with the stopcocks open at the time it is returned to service.) The
, origin of any water detected in the cylinder must be determined, and any cylinder head that leaks because of a crack shall be replaced.
The above-air roll test may be discontinued following the first re-fueling outage subject to the following conditions:
(a) All cylinder heads are Group III heads (i.e., cast after September, 1980).
(b) Quality revalidation inspections, as identified in the Design Review / Quality Revalidation report, have been completed for all cylinder heads.
(c) Group III heads continue to den.onstrate leak-free perfomance.
This should be confimed with TDI before deleting air-roll tests are discontinued.
- 5. Periodic inspections of the turbochargers shall include the following:
(a) The turbocharger thrust bearings should be visually inspected for excessive wear after 40 nonprelubed starts since the previous visual inspection.
(b) Turbocharger rotor axial clearance should be measured at each refueling outage to verify compliance with TDI/Elliott specifications.
In addition, thrust bearing rieasurements should be compared with measurements taken previously to determine a need for further inspection or corrective acticn.
(c) Spectrographic and ferrographic engine oil analysis shall be performed quarterly to provide early evidence of bearing degradation.
Particular attention should be paid to copper level and particulate size, which could signify thrust bearing degradation.
(d) The nozzle ring components and inlet guide vanes should be visually inspected at each refueling outage for missing parts or parts show-ing distress on a one-turbocharger-per-refueling-outage basis. In addition, these inspections should be perfortred for all turbochargers at each turbocharger overhaul (i.e., at approximately 5-year intervals).
If any missing parts or distress is noted, the entire ring assenbly should be replaced and the subject turbocharger should be reinspected at the next refueling outage".
- 2. Justification for the proposed Change _s_
As discussed in NUREG-1216, the staff has concluded that resolution of the TDI diesel generator issue involves implementation of an acceptable Phase I program as identified in Section 2.1 of NUREG-1216, an acceptable Phase Il program as identified in Section 2.2 of NUREG-1216,'and implementation of an acceptable maintenance and surveillance program as identified in Section 2.3 of NUREG-1216.
The licensee's implementation of each of these phases is discussed below.
(a) Resolution of Phase I, Phase I relates to the resolution of known generic problem areas intended by the Owners Group to serve as a basis for the licensing of plants during the period before completion of Phase II of the Owners Group program. By letters dated August 1, and September 11, 1986, the licensee responded, among other things, to the items in Section 2.1 of NUREG-1216. The licensee's submittals documented past actions and provided the necessary commitments for all items required by Section 2.1 of NUREG-1216. The staff has reviewed these submittals and finds that the licensee has met Section 2.1 of NUREG-1216 requirerrents for an acceptable Phase I program.
(b) Resolution of Phase II Phase II relates to design review / quality revalidation of a large set of important engine components to ensure that their design and manufacture, including specifications, quality control and quality assurance, and operational surveillance and maintenance, are adequate. By letter dated November 4,1985, the licensee documented the Design Review and Quality Revalidation (DR/0R)
Review for Catawba Unit 1. The licensee transmitted the results of Quality Revalidation (QR) Inspections to the NRC staff by letters dated June 29, 1964 (diesel 1A), and July 6, 1984 (diesel IB). As documented in these reports and the August 1,1986, submittal, the licensee has completed Phase II of the S:ners Group recornmendations for Unit 1. By letter dated May 19, 1986, the licensee informeo the staff of its actions related to three design modifications proposed by the Owners Group. The staff has reviewed these actions and finds that they provide acceptable alternatives for implementing the Owners Group reconnendations.
Furthennore, the staff finds that the licensee has met Section 2.2 of NUREG-1216 requiren,ents for an acceptable Phase II program.
(c) Resoluti,o,rt of Maintenance and, Surveillance Program This program relates to expanded engine tests and inspections as needed to sup-port Phases I and II. The licensee has implenented the maintenance and
p surveillance reconnendations developed by the Owners Group in Ap~pendix II, Re-vision 2, of the DR/QR report for Catawba. Furthermore, the staff proposed the sample license conditions in NUREG-1216 to ensure adequate inspection of cer-tain components. By letter dated August 6,1986, the licensee proposed a license anendment for Catawba Unit I to incorporate the staff's proposed sample license conditions as they are applicable to Catawba Unit 1. The staff has reviewed the licensee's submittals and finds that the licensee has met Section 2.3 of l NUREG-1216 requirements for an acceptable maintenance and surveillance orogram.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION The amendment involves a change in use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes in surveillance requiren,ents. The staff has determined that the amendment involves no signi-ficant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any
, effluents that may be released offsite and that there is no significant in-crease in individual or cumulative occupational exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendnent involves to significant hazards consideration, and there have been no public comments on such finding.
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical ex-clusion set forth in 10 CFR Section 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
IV. CONCLUSION The Commission made a proposed determination that the amendment involves nc significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (51 FR 30561) on August 27, 1986, and consulted with the state of South Carolina.
No public concents were received, and the state of South Carolina did not have any comments. We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: Kahtan Jabbour, PWRf4/DPWR-A Dated: October 21, 1986 l
t i
- - - - - - - -